Kaquilala Junrey Z. RCD

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES
938 AURORA BOULEVARD CUBAO QUEZON CITY
COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE
CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
CE 502
REINFORCED CONCRETE DESIGN
DESIGN OF 5-STOREY RESIDENTIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING
SUBMITTED BY:
KAQUILALA, JUNREY Z.
CE51FC1
SUBMITTED TO:
ENGR. MICO P. CRUZADO
MARCH, 26 2020
1
Design Experience Information
CE 502 Reinforced Concrete Design
2nd Semester, SY 2019-2020
Student/Team Group KAQUILALA, JUNREY Z.

DESIGN OF A 5-STOREY RESIDENTIAL REINFORCED
Project Title
CONCRETE BUILDING
Program Concentration Area STRUCTURAL
Constraints
Economic Constraint limits the design of the proposed structure within the
financial capabilities of the client. The designer aims to lower the cost of
the proposed structure at its minimum without compromising the expected
structural performance in withstanding all possible types of loading.
Economic
Economic constraint or cost is one of the major constraints needed to be
managed in a project. As a result, the designer has come up with three
major designs or trade-offs for slabs namely, One-way slab, Two-way
slab, Flat plate. Each trade-off will be designed as economical as possible.
Sustainability indeed plays an important role in construction industry since

it is also incorporated to the concept of maintaining the structure serving its
intended purpose for a very long time. The principle of sustainability is
Sustainability about the prevention of collapse of the structure and prevention of loss of
life. The designer should also consider the sustainability constraints for the
design of the project. The ability of the slab design methodologies to
sustain the load it carries is needed to be considered. In this way, the creep
may be minimized or managed through the additional reinforcement bars.
Constructability is measured according the number of man hours or days of
Constructability completion. Due to the fact that there is a limit in terms of the financial
capacity of the client, the winning trade-off shall be constructed in shortest
time. In this way, the client will save up some of the labor cost.
The safety of the occupants is still the priority of the designers in
developing the final design for the proposed structure. Collapse of the
columns is the worst type of failure that designers must strongly consider.
In order to prevent the loss of life, different kinds of energy dissipation are
analyzed by the designers. Safety is the primary consideration in designing
Health and Safety a residential building since the structure will be occupied. These three types
of column is already proven to be effective in carrying loads. These slabs
are reinforced with bars supported by temperature bars with its spacing
designed. Each of the trade-offs will be deliberated based on the capacity of
the slab itself to support the load coming from the highest level based on
the deflection that might occur while loads are being applied into it.
Risk Assessment Loads such as dead loads, live loads, wind loads and other loads associated
2
with the structure were all taken into consideration. Drift of the storey is
one of the measure of this constraint given that the structure is located at
approximately 1.6 km away from the West Valley Fault System. The
structure must be designed to withstand these loads to satisfy its
serviceability and intended purpose requirements.
The designers used Concrete as their main material in developing the final
Environmental Constraint design of the proposed structure.
Trade-offs
Structural Context
One way slab is supported on two opposite side only thus structural action
is only at one direction. Total load is carried in the direction perpendicular
to the supporting beam. If a slab is supported on all the four sides but the
Trade-Off 1: ratio of longer span (l) to shorten span (b) is greater than 2, then the slab
will be considered as one way slab. Because due to the huge difference in
One Way Slab lengths, load is not transferred to the shorter beams. Main reinforcement is
provided in only one direction for one way slabs.
Two way slabs are the slabs that are supported on four sides and the ratio of
Trade-Off 2:
longer span (l) to shorter span (b) is less than 2. In two way slabs, load will
be carried in both the directions. So, main reinforcement is provided in both
Two Way Slab
direction for two way slabs.
A flat plate is a one- or two-way system usually supported directly on
columns or loadbearing walls. It is one of the most common forms of
construction of floors in buildings. The principal feature of the flat plate
floor is a uniform or near-uniform thickness with a flat soffit which requires
Trade-Off 3: only simple formwork and is easy to construct.
The floor allows great flexibility for locating horizontal services above a
Flat Plate suspended ceiling or in a bulkhead. The economical span of a flat plate for
low to medium loads is usually limited by the need to control long-term
deflection and may need to be sensibly pre-cambered (not overdone) or
prestressed.
Standards
The National Building Code of the Philippines (PD 1096). The National
Building Code of the Philippines, also known as Presidential Decree No.
1096 was formulated and adopted as a uniform building code to embody
1. National Building Code
up-to-date and modern technical knowledge on building design,
of the Philippines (PD
construction, use, occupancy and maintenance. The Code provides for all
1096)
buildings and structures, a framework of minimum standards and
requirements to regulate and control location, site, design, and quality of
materials, construction, use, occupancy, and maintenance.
2. National Structural The National Structural Code of the Philippines 2015. This code provides
Code of the Philippines minimum standards to safeguard life or limb, property and public welfare
3
2015 by regulating and controlling the design, construction, quality of materials
pertaining to the structural aspects of all buildings and structures within its
jurisdiction. The provision of this code shall apply to the construction,
alteration, moving, demolition, repair, maintenance and use of any building
or structure within its jurisdiction, except work located primarily in a public
way, public utility towers and poles, hydraulic flood control structures, and
indigenous family dwellings.
Modern Tools/Techniques
1. AutoCAD
STAAD Pro is a comprehensive and integrated finite element analysis and
design offering that includes a state-of-the-art user interface, visualization
capabilities, and international design codes. It is capable of analyzing any
2. STAAD Pro VSi8 structure exposed to static loading, a dynamic response, wind, earthquake,
and moving loads. It is the premier FEM analysis and design tool for any
type of project including towers, plants, bridges, stadiums, and marine
structures.
3. Excel 2018 Analysis and Computation of Structural System
4
Table of Contents
DESIGN OF 5-STOREY REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING .................................................................................1
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND......................................................................................................................8
1.1 The Project ..........................................................................................................................................................8
1.2 Project Location ...................................................................................................................................................9
Figure 1-2: Site Location of the Project ..........................................................................................................................9
1.3 Project Objectives ................................................................................................................................................9
1.4 The Client ..........................................................................................................................................................10
1.5 Project Scope and Limitations ...........................................................................................................................10
1.6 Project Development .........................................................................................................................................10
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS ...................................................................................................................................12
2.1 Description of the Structure ...............................................................................................................................12
2.2 Classification of the Structure ............................................................................................................................14
2.3 Design Loads and Parameters ..........................................................................................................................15
2.3.1 Dead Loads ................................................................................................................................................15
2.3.2 Live Loads ..................................................................................................................................................15
2.3.3 Earthquake Load Parameters.....................................................................................................................15
2.3.4 Wind Load ..................................................................................................................................................16
2.4 Architectural Plans .............................................................................................................................................16
2.4.1 Floor Plans .................................................................................................................................................17
Figure 2-4: Ground Floor Plan 5 ..................................................................................................................................17
2.4.2 Elevation Plans...........................................................................................................................................19
Figure 2-6: Front Elevation Plan ..................................................................................................................................19
Figure 2-7: Rear Elevation Plan ...................................................................................................................................20
Figure 2-8: Left Elevation Plan .....................................................................................................................................21
Figure 2-9: Right Elevation Plan ..................................................................................................................................22
Review of Related Literature ........................................................................................................................................26
CHAPTER 3: CONSTRAINTS, TRADEOFFS, AND STANDARDS .............................................................................30
3.1 Design Constraints ............................................................................................................................................30
3.1.1 Economical (Cost) ......................................................................................................................................30
3.1.2 Safety (Bending).........................................................................................................................................30
3.1.3 Manufacturability (Man Hour Production) ...................................................................................................30
3.1.4 Sustainability ..............................................................................................................................................30
5
3.2 Trade-offs ..........................................................................................................................................................31
3.3 Assessment .......................................................................................................................................................33
3.3.1 Economical Assessment ............................................................................................................................33
3.3.2 Manufacturability Assessment ....................................................................................................................34
3.3.3 Safety Assessment.....................................................................................................................................34
3.4 Raw Designer’s Ranking ...................................................................................................................................34
3.5 Trade-offs Assessment .................................................................................................................................35
3.6 Initial Cost Estimate ...........................................................................................................................................37
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE ............................................................................................................41
4.1 Design Methodology ..........................................................................................................................................41
Figure 4-1: Stages of the Design Process ...................................................................................................................41
4.1.1 Design of Beams ........................................................................................................................................42
Figure 4-2: Flow Chart for the Design of Beams ..........................................................................................................42
4.1.1.1 Results ....................................................................................................................................................42
4.1.2 Design of Columns .....................................................................................................................................43
Figure 4-3: Flow Chart for the Design of Columns .......................................................................................................43
4.1.2.1 Results ....................................................................................................................................................43
4.1.3 Design of Two-Way Slab ............................................................................................................................44
Figure 4-4-: Flow Chart for the Design of Two-Way Slab.............................................................................................44
4.1.3.1 Results ....................................................................................................................................................44
4.1.4 Design of One-way Slab.............................................................................................................................45
Figure 4-5: Flow Chart for the Design of One- Way Slab .............................................................................................45
4.1.4.1 Results ....................................................................................................................................................45
4.1.5 Design of Flat Plate ....................................................................................................................................46
Figure 4-6: Flow Chart for the Design of Flat Plate ......................................................................................................46
4.1.5.1 Results ....................................................................................................................................................46
4.2 Geometric Modeling (Two-Way Slab) ................................................................................................................47
4.2.1 Framing Plan (Two-Way Slab) ...................................................................................................................48
4.2.2 Wind Load ..................................................................................................................................................48
4.2.3 SEISMIC LOAD ..........................................................................................................................................49
4.2.4 LOADING ...................................................................................................................................................50
4.2.5 DEFLECTION.............................................................................................................................................51
4.2.6 FORCES ....................................................................................................................................................51
6
4.2.7 STRESS .....................................................................................................................................................52
4.2.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (Two-Way Slab) ...............................................................................................52
4.3 Geometric Modeling (One-Way Slab) ................................................................................................................53
4.3.1 Framing Plan (One-Way Slab) ...................................................................................................................54
4.3.2 Wind Load ..................................................................................................................................................54
4.3.3 SEISMIC LOAD ..........................................................................................................................................55
4.3.4 LOADING ...................................................................................................................................................56
4.3.5 DEFLECTION.............................................................................................................................................57
4.3.6 Forces ........................................................................................................................................................57
4.3.7 STRESS .....................................................................................................................................................58
4.3.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (One-Way Slab) ...............................................................................................58
4.4 Geometric Modeling (Flat Plate) ........................................................................................................................59
4.4.1 Framing Plan (Flat Plate) ...........................................................................................................................59
4.4.2 Wind Load ..................................................................................................................................................60
4.4.3 SEISMIC LOAD ..........................................................................................................................................61
4.4.4 LOADING ...................................................................................................................................................62
4.4.5 DEFLECTION.............................................................................................................................................62
4.4.6 Forces ........................................................................................................................................................63
4.3.7 STRESS .....................................................................................................................................................63
4.4.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (Flat Plate) .......................................................................................................64
4.5 Validation of Multiple Constraints, Trade-Offs, and Standards ..........................................................................64
4.6 Final Estimates of the Trade-Offs ......................................................................................................................65
4.7 Computation for the Final Designer’s Ranking ..................................................................................................65
4.8 Designer’s Final Ranking Assessment ..............................................................................................................67
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN ......................................................................................................................................68
5.1 Design Schedule................................................................................................................................................68
APPENDIX A: CODES AND STANDARDS .................................................................................................................71
APPENDIX B: COST ESTIMATES ..............................................................................................................................83
APPENDIX C: MANUAL COMPUTATION OF BEAMSFor Two – Way Slab ...............................................................85
APPENDIX D: MANUAL COMPUTATION OF COLUMNS ........................................................................................ 134
APPENDIX E: COMPUTATION FOR SLAB .............................................................................................................. 149
7
CHAPTER 1: PROJECT BACKGROUND
1.1 The Project
The project is a design of a five storey structure which will serve as a residential building located along
President Jose P. Luarel Highway. This project will be connecting two major highways, the Ayala
Highway and the Tiaong-Lipa Road , where huge establishments are located including malls and
schools. This developing city, where jobs and opportunities are found, is one potential place where this
residential building should be built.
The residential building has a total lot area of 3500 m2 and a floor dimension of 25 m. x 28 m. It is
rectangular in shape, has five levels, and a roof deck. The first floor consists of two (3) rentable units
assigned for commercial services, an administrative office with reception and a utility room. The stairs,
designed for public use and emergency purposes, are located near the entrance of the building and
adjacent to the elevator. The positioning of the elevators is deliberately placed at the entrance of the
building to maximize the space of the units on this floor. The succeeding second to fifth floors of the
building have typical designs having four (4) rentable units each.
The structural members of this residential building will be designed as Reinforced Concrete using the
National Structural Code of the Philippines 2015 as its reference.
Figure1-1: Perspective View of the Project
8
1.2 Project Location
Figure 1-2: Site Location of the Project

The commercial building is located along President Jose P. Laurel Highway, Lipa, Batangas City.
1.3 Project Objectives

In line with the intended Student Outcomes (SO’s) of TIP-QC Civil Engineering Department, the objective of
this project is to apply the concepts and principles of mathematics, science and engineering, particularly
Structural Design.
1.3.1 General Objective:
The objective of this project is to design the beam, slab and column system of a reinforced concrete
commercial building using the Ultimate Stress Design (USD) with having one-way slab, two-way slab and
flat plate slab as trade-offs.
1.3.2 Specific Objectives:
 To design a five storey residential building using reinforced concrete in accordance with the existing
structural codes and standards.
 To provide a structural design based on the client’s needs.
 To be able to evaluate the effects of the design constraints and trade-offs for the final design.
 To arrive on the most economical cost but not compromising its quality.
9
1.4 The Client
The client for the project is Mr. Alexander Grande an entrepreneur who wants to start business for
her family who lives nearby the place and who is assuming good profit from this investment
1.5 Project Scope and Limitations
The scopes for the design of the project are as follows:
1) Conceptualization of the design of the project according to the National Structural Code of
the Philippines 2015 and the National Building Code of the Philippines
2) To provide the required design drawings and other structural member details
3) To analyze the structure using Staad Pro V8i.
The limitations for the design of the project are as follows:
1) The estimated cost for the slabs in the tradeoffs is the only amount considered in the
economic constraint, hence the estimated cost for the mechanical, electrical, architectural
and plumbing works are not considered.
2) The detailed flow of construction work is not provided.
3) The interior design of the structure was also not considered.
4) The designer will only give the cost estimate for the trade-offs and the structure using the
average cost per design.
1.6 Project Development
The structural design of the residential building was developed through five phases, namely:
Conceptualization, Formulation of Design Constraints, Tradeoffs and Design Standards, Initial
Architectural Layout and Design, Structural Design, and Design Analysis.
The first phase for the development of the project is conceptualization, in which the designer
considered the client’s needs and demands. This is the basis on how the designer will design the
structure that is suited for his client. The second phase is the formulation of the design constraints,
tradeoffs and design standards, in which the designer will now consider the existing codes and
standards to formulate the optimum design of the structure. The third phase is where the projects
architectural plans where developed. The next phase is the structural design of the project, in
which the designer provides the structural plan and specifications of the project according to the
National Structural Code of the Philippines and the National Building Code of the Philippines. The
last one is d\the design analysis, in which the design project is analyzed manually and through
engineering software to see if it is safe for usage.
10
Figure 1-3: Project Development Phases
11
CHAPTER 2: DESIGN INPUTS
2.1 Description of the Structure
The structure is designed to be a five-storey residential building and is to be located along

President Jose P. Luarel Highway. It has a total lot area of 3500 m 2 and a floor dimension of 25m.
x 28m for each level. The elevators and staircases where positioned on the main entrance of the
building for easy access and to maximize the available floor spaces. The structure has a total of 16
rentable residential units in which four rooms are located on each level from second floor to the fifth
floor. Each unit has an area of 36.94 m2, a floor dimension of 7.5 m x 4.93 m, and a balcony. On
the ground floor, three rentable units assigned for 24 hour commercial business is found. The
management office is also found on the first floor which has an area of 36.75sqm, the same with
the rentable commercial unit parallel to it, while the remaining commercial units on the ground floor
has a floor area of 32.68sqm.
It is designed to have a 3.2m storey height for each floor level with the entire structure designed as
a special moment reinforced concrete.
Figure 2-1 Structural Model of the Building for Two way slab
12
Figure 2-2 - Structural Model of the Building for One way slab
Figure 2-3 Structural Model of the Building for Flat Plate
13
2.2 Classification of the Structure
Based on the National Structural Code of the Philippines, the designers classified the type of
occupancy of the commercial building as Type III Occupancy Category: Special Occupancy
Structure. The seismic analysis of the structure is determined based on its occupancy category. (to
be verified)
Room Description Function Area
For Use of the Property Owner and the Administration Administrative Office 36.75 m2
For Reception of Tenants and Visitors Reception Area 10.84 m2
For Business Purposes Rentable Unit 36.75 m2
For Business Purposes Rentable Unit 32.68 m2
For Male and Female Tenant with at least 3 cubicles each Rentable Unit 36.75 m2
Comfort Room for Ground Floor Comfort Room 6.25 m2
Table 2-1: Room Classification with Corresponding Area
Function Quantity
Administrative Office 1
Reception Area 1
Rentable Unit A 16
Commercial Unit A 1
Commercial Unit B 2
Total 23
Table 2-2: Function and Quantity of Room
14
2.3 Design Loads and Parameters
2.3.1 Dead Loads

Materials Density(Kn/m^3)
Concrete (Reinforced) 23.6
Glass 25.1
Aluminum 26.7
Item.
Elevator(includes self weight and passenger 17.34

capacity)
2.3.2 Live Loads

The building will be used mainly for residential purposes thus NSCP 2015 provides that the slab will carry a
minimum uniform live load of 1.9 Kpa
2.3.3 Earthquake Load Parameters

Importance Factor 1
Soil Profile Type Stiff Soil Profile (Type 4)
Seismic Zone Zone 4 (Z=0.4)
Seismic Source Type A
Closest Distance to known Seismic Source 10.2km
Near-Source Factor (Na) 1
Near Source Factor (Nv) 1.1123
Ct 0.0691
R (Special R.C. Moment Resisting Frame) 8.5
15
2.3.4 Wind Load
Basic Wind Speed 200kph
Exposure Category B
Building Classification Category IV
Structure Type Building Structure
Enclosed Classification Enclosed
Importance Factor 1
2.4 Architectural Plans
The designer has provided the architectural plans for the client. The structural design of the
commercial building shall conform to the following floor plans and elevation plans.
16
2.4.1 Floor Plans
Figure 2-4: Ground Floor Plan 4
The figure shows the ground floor which consists of (3) commercial units, (1) management office
and (2) Comfort rooms, one for each gender.
17
Figure 2-5: Typical 2nd to 5th Floor Plan 5
The figure shows the typical second to fifth floor plan of the commercial building. It consists of four
(4) rentable units for each floor level.
18
2.4.2 Elevation Plans
Figure 2-6: Front Elevation Plan
19
Figure 2-7: Rear Elevation Plan
20
:
Figure 2-8: Left Elevation Plan
21
Figure 2-9: Right Elevation Plan
22
Figure 2-10 (Framing of One Way Slab)
23
Figure 2-11 (Framing of Two Way Slab)
24
Figure 2-12: (Framing of Flat Plate)
25
Review of Related Literature
Load History Effect on Cyclic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Tied Columns
The effect of two commonly used load histories on the ductility and energy dissipation capacity of
reinforced concrete tied columns is presented. Based on regression analyses of the test results
reported in the literature, the effective confinement steel ratio is shown to provide a good
correlation with the performance indexes studied. The parameters accounted for include the
amount of transverse reinforcement, the axial load level, and the effectiveness of the tie
configurations. For moderate values of the effective confinement steel ratio, load history with
increments of two times the yield displacement is slightly more severe than that with one yield
displacement increments. The limited data available indicate that the effect of load history tends to
be less significant for higher values of the effective confinement steel ratio.
Source: https://goo.gl/Fwc1co
Analytical Moment‐Curvature Relations for Tied Concrete Columns
The research reported here is a follow‐up on experimental work in which 16 12 in. (305 mm)
square and 9 ft (2.74 m) long columns were tested under flexure to large inelastic deformations
while simultaneously subjected to axial load that remained constant throughout the test. The main
variables included the distribution of longitudinal and lateral steel, amount of lateral steel, tie
spacing, and axial load level. In this paper, the predictions for the behavior of these specimens
from the available stress‐strain models for confined concrete are compared with the test results.
After a critical examination of the analytical models and the variables that affect the behavior of the
specimens, a model originally proposed for concentric compression was modified to include the
effects of strain gradient and the level of axial load. As a result of strain gradient, the concrete is
able to sustain additional deformation at and beyond the peak stress. The effect of increased axial
load is incorporated with reduced concrete strength. A numerical example is presented in which the
use of a rectangular stress block representing the actual stress‐strain curve of concrete obtained
from the confinement model is demonstrated.
Source: https://goo.gl/W7c9ky
A model of confined concrete in high-strength reinforced concrete tied columns
An experimental and analytical study was conducted to develop the confined concrete model of
reinforced high-strength concrete tied columns subjected to monotonically increasing concentric
axial compression. Twenty-one large-scale columns (260 × 260 × 1200 mm) of high-strength
concrete of 50 MPa and 85 MPa were fabricated to simulate full-size structural members. The
effects of the main variables such as the concrete compressive strengths, tie configurations,
26
amount of the transverse reinforcement, tie spacing and the spalling of the concrete cover were
studied in this research program. More confinement is required in columns of high-strength
concrete than in columns of low-strength concrete to achieve the same degree of strength
enhancement. The proposed model satisfactorily predicted the experimental stress–strain
behaviours for the confined high-strength concrete up to 100 MPa.
Source: https://goo.gl/WkAO35
Analytical Model for FRP Confinement of Concrete Columns with and without Internal Steel
Reinforcement
The paper aims to contribute to a better understanding of the behavior of reinforced concrete
columns confined with fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) sheets. In particular, some new insights on
interaction mechanisms between internal steel reinforcement and external FRP strengthening and
their influence on efficiency of FRP confinement technique are given. In this context a procedure to
generate the complete stress-strain response including new analytical proposals for (1) effective
confinement pressure at failure; (2) peak stress; (3) ultimate stress; (4) ultimate axial strain; and (5)
axial strain corresponding to peak stress for FRP confined elements with circular and rectangular
cross sections, with and without internal steel reinforcement, is presented. Interaction mechanisms
between internal steel reinforcement and external FRP strengthening, shown by some
experimental results obtained at the University of Padova with accurate measurements, are taken
into account in the analytical model. Four experimental databases regarding FRP confined
concrete columns, with circular and rectangular cross section with and without steel reinforcement,
are gathered for the assessment of some of the confinement models shown in literature and the
new proposed model. The proposed model shows a good performance and analytical stress-strain
curves approximate some available test results quite well.
Source: https://goo.gl/HIAYzZ
Effects of Confinement on Concrete Columns: Plasticity Approach
The theory of plasticity and the deformation compatibility equations are used to evaluate the
development of lateral confinement of concrete columns, and the resulting increases in strength
and ductility. Concrete is modeled as an elastoplastic material following a simple Drucker‐Prager
nonassociative hardening model. The lateral reinforcement is replaced by an equivalent sleeve that
surrounds the concrete core. The solution is based on the integration of the elastoplastic relations
for the concrete core, the transverse steel reinforcement, and the concrete cover. The lateral
pressure on the concrete core is calculated based on the compatibility of deformations of the
expanding core and the surrounding reinforcement. The ability of the method to predict the
response of confined compression members is demonstrated based on numerous published
experimental results. The application of the theory is currently restricted to circular ties and spirals.
Future studies will address rectangular confinement.
27
Source: https://goo.gl/vC2Ohs
Testing and modeling of a novel FRP-encased steel–concrete composite column
A composite column consisting of steel, concrete and fiber reinforced polymer (FRP) is presented
and assessed through experimental testing and analytical modelling. The composite column
utilizes a glass FRP (GFRP) composite tube that surrounds a steel I-section, which is subsequently
filled with concrete. The GFRP tube acts as a stay-in-place form in addition to providing
confinement to the concrete. This study investigates the behavior of the proposed composite
columns under axial loading. A total of seven specimens were tested. The influence of concrete
shrinkage on the compressive behavior of the composite columns was also investigated.
Significant confinement and composite action resulted in enhanced compressive behavior. The
addition of a shrinkage reducing agent was found to further improve the compressive behavior of
the composite columns. An analytical model was developed to predict the behavior of the
composite columns under axial loading.
Source: https://goo.gl/UQp1ch
Flexural–torsional buckling of open section composite columns with shear deformation
The paper presents the stability analysis of axially loaded, thin-walled open section, orthotropic
composite columns. Vlasov's classical theory is modified to include both the transverse (flexural)
shear and the restrained warping induced shear deformations. In addition to the bending stiffness
matrix a (3×3) shear stiffness matrix is introduced. A closed form solution is derived for the
flexural–torsional buckling load of composite columns. A simplified, approximate solution is also
presented, in which the effect of the shear deformations is included using Föppl's theorem.
Source: https://goo.gl/5uXHpU
Experimental study of flax FRP tube encased coir fibre reinforced concrete composite column
The use of natural fibres as building materials is benefit to achieve a sustainable construction. This
paper reports on an experimental investigation of a composite column consisting of flax fibre
reinforced polymer (FFRP) and coir fibre reinforced concrete (CFRC), i.e. FFRP tube encased
CFRC (FFRP-CFRC). In this FFRP-CFRC, coir fibre is the reinforcement of the concrete and FFRP
tube as formwork provides confinement to the concrete. Uniaxial compression and third-point
bending tests were conducted to assess the compression and flexural performance of the
composite column. A total of 36 specimens were tested. The test variables were FFRP tube
thickness and coir fibre inclusion. The axial stress–strain response, confinement performance,
lateral load–displacement response, bond behaviour and failure modes of the composite column
were analysed. In addition, the confined concrete compressive strength was predicted using
existing strength equations/models and compared with the experimental results. Results indicate
28
that the FFRP-CFRC composite columns using natural fibres have the potential to be axial and
flexural structural members.
Source: https://goo.gl/kxerZR
Thermal buckling of a heat-exposed, axially restrained composite column
The response of composite columns under axial compressive loading, and in which a non-uniform
temperature distribution through the thickness exists, is investigated. This non-uniform temperature
distribution can develop when one side of the structures is exposed to heat flux. In this paper, we
assume that this distribution is linear, which corresponds to a steady state temperature profile due
to heat conduction. The degradation of the elastic properties with temperature (especially near the
glass transition temperature of the matrix) is accounted for, by using experimental data for the
elastic moduli. Furthermore, the formulation includes transverse shear and it is done first for the
general non-linear case and subsequently linearized. Due to the non-uniform stiffness and the
effect of the ensuing thermal moment, the structure behaves like an imperfect column, and
responds by bending rather than buckling in the classical Euler (bifurcation) sense. Another
important effect of the non-uniform temperature is that the neutral axis moves away from the
centroid of the cross-section, resulting in another moment due to eccentric loading, which would
tend to bend the structure away from the heat source. Simple equations for the response of the
column are derived and results are presented for the variation of the deflection with the heat flux,
as well as for the combined effects of the applied load and heat flux. It is found that the thermal
moment would tend to bend the structure away from the heat source for small temperatures (small
heat fluxes) but towards the heat source for large temperatures. On the contrary, the moment
induced due to the eccentric loading would always tend to bend the structure away from the heat
source. Results indicate the combined influences of these moments and that of axial constraint.
Source: https://goo.gl/BxHj9f
The Behavior of reinforced concrete slabs in Fire
In this paper a robust model is presented based on the previous layer procedure developed by the author to also take
into account the effects of concrete spalling on the behavior of concrete slabs under fire conditions. In this study, a
detailed analysis of a uniformly loaded reinforced concrete slab subject to different degrees of concrete spalling
under a standard fire regime is first carried out. Further, a series of analysis of floor slabs with different degrees of
concrete spalling is also performed on a generic reinforced concrete building. A total of 16 cases have been analyzed
using different degrees of spalling on the slabs, with different extents and positions of localized fire compartments. It
is clear that adjacent cool structures provide considerable thermal restraint to the floor slabs within the fire
compartment. And it is evident that the compressive membrane force within the slabs is a major player in reducing
the impact of concrete spalling on the structural behavior of floor slabs in fire.
Source: https://goo.gl/jsw4Sj
29
CHAPTER 3: CONSTRAINTS, TRADEOFFS, AND STANDARDS
3.1 Design Constraints
In the design of the structure, it is important to consider the different effects of the design
constraints and limitations to the structure. Constraint is defined as the limiting condition that may
affect the design and construction of the project. These constraints may range from economical,
environmental, cultural, social, societal, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability and
sustainability among others. These constraints should be managed to reduce or eliminate its
limiting factors.
In this project, the limiting constraints are as follows:
3.1.1 Economical (Cost)
Economic constraint or cost is one of the major constraints needed to be managed in a project. As
a result, the designer has come up with three major designs or trade-offs for slabs namely, One-
way slab, Two-way slab, Flat plate. Each trade-off will be designed as economical as possible.
3.1.2 Safety (Bending)
Safety is the primary consideration in designing a residential building since the structure will be
occupied. These three types of column is already proven to be effective in carrying loads. These
slabs are reinforced with bars supported by temperature bars with its spacing designed. Each of
the trade-offs will be deliberated based on the capacity of the slab itself to support the load coming
from the highest level based on the deflection that might occur while loads are being applied into it.
3.1.3 Manufacturability (Man Hour Production)
The manufacturability is also one of the constraints that are to be considered in the commercial
building. The manufacturability of the trade-offs will be evaluated based on their advantages and
disadvantages on the construction of the project. The slabs will be evaluated based on the effect of
each trade-off and the duration they will be completed.
3.1.4 Sustainability
The designer should also consider the sustainability constraints for the design of the project. The
ability of the slab design methodologies to sustain the load it carries is needed to be considered. In
this way, the creep may be minimized or managed through the additional reinforcement bars.
30
3.2 Trade-offs
The designer has come up with three possible options for the design of the slab that have its own
advantages and disadvantages that could satisfy the given constraints. The framing for each slab was
designed and named as for the majority of the type of slab present. The presence of other types is
inevitable because of the symmetric design. Three types of slab will be compared namely the one way,
two way, and flat slab. Trade-offs will be evaluated in such a way that the constraints will be satisfied.
ONE WAY SLAB
Image Source: https://goo.gl/F0NGsc
31
One way slab is supported on two opposite side only thus structural action is only at one direction.
Total load is carried in the direction perpendicular to the supporting beam. If a slab is supported on all
the four sides but the ratio of longer span (l) to shorten span (b) is greater than 2, then the slab will be
considered as one way slab. Because due to the huge difference in lengths, load is not transferred to
the shorter beams. Main reinforcement is provided in only one direction for one way slabs.
Source: https://goo.gl/TTYfrP
TWO WAY SLAB
Image Source: https://www.google.com/search
Two way slabs are the slabs that are supported on four sides and the ratio of longer span (l) to shorter span
(b) is less than 2. In two way slabs, load will be carried in both the directions. So, main reinforcement is
provided in both direction for two way slabs. Source: https://goo.gl/DyT7y3
32
FLAT PLATE
Image Source: https://goo.gl/ZkKvNz
A flat plate is a one- or two-way system usually supported directly on columns or loadbearing walls. It is
one of the most common forms of construction of floors in buildings. The principal feature of the flat plate
floor is a uniform or near-uniform thickness with a flat soffit which requires only simple formwork and is
easy to construct.
The floor allows great flexibility for locating horizontal services above a suspended ceiling or in a bulkhead.
The economical span of a flat plate for low to medium loads is usually limited by the need to control long-
term deflection and may need to be sensibly pre-cambered (not overdone) or prestressed.
Source: https://goo.gl/ZkKvNz
3.3 Assessment
3.3.1 Economical Assessment

For the economical assessment of the given tradeoffs, the designer has considered the estimated cost of
constructing a slab neglecting the project cost of the whole structure. It turned out that the one way slab is
cheaper than the two way and the flat plate
33
3.3.2 Manufacturability Assessment
The manufacturability assessment of the trade-offs is done by considering the duration of constructing the
three options. It is done by computing the total volume of concrete needed to construct the slabs and
multiplying it to an estimated amount of time a worker completes the work for the given quantity of
concrete. The one way slab is faster to do than the other two.
3.3.3 Safety Assessment

The safety assessment of the slab is estimated by using the ACI code. The link is given on the table below.
3.4 Raw Designer’s Ranking
After considering the design criteria and constraints of the project, the designer was able to come up with
the raw ranking of the two-way slab system, one-way slab system with intermediate beam and the flat
plate. The discussion and computation on how the designer came up with the raw rankings values are
shown below.
Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the criterion

Importance (on a scale from -5 to 5)
Decision Criteria (on a scale
of 0 to 5)
One–Way Slab Flat Plate with less
Two–Way
with Intermediate beam
Slab
Beams
1. Economic 4 5 4 3
2. Manufacturability 4 5 4 3
3. Safety 5 3 3 5
Over-all Rank 55 47 49
Table 3-1: Raw Designer’s Ranking

*Reference: Otto, K. N. and Antonsson, E. K., (1991). Trade-off strategies in engineering design. Research
in Engineering Design, volume 3, number 2, pages 87-104.
Retrieved from http://www.design.caltech.edu/Research/Publications/90e.pdf on March 11, 2013
34
Computation of ranking for ability to satisfy criterion of materials:
Equation 3.1
Equation 3.2
The governing rank is the subjective value given by the designer. It is based on the judgment of the
designer on ranking the importance of each constraint. The subordinate rank can then be solved using the
given equation in Equation 3.2.
Figure 3-3: Otto and Antonsson’s Ranking Scale
3.5 Trade-offs Assessment
The designer has proposed two possible options for the design of the floor system of the project.
The first option is a two-way slab and the second one is a one-way slab which is supported by
intermediate beams at the midspan and lastly flat plates which can support itself. The tradeoffs are
assessed based on their advantages and disadvantages for the design of the floor system of the
five-storey residential building.
Two-Way Slabs
The first option for the design of the floor system of the five-storey residential building is the two-
way slab. A two-way slab is a slab system that is designed to resist bending in both directions, as
such; the reinforcement for a two-way slab is also laid out in two directions to resist the bending
that occurs in both directions.
Advantages of System
 Symmetrical framework
 Load is distributed in two sides
Disadvantages of System
35
 Complicated Framework
One-Way Slabs
The next tradeoff for the design of the system is the usage of one-way slabs with intermediate
beams. A one-way slab is a floor system that is designed to resist bending in the direction
perpendicular to the edge supports. It passes load on one direction only. The reinforcement for
one-way slabs is laid out in one direction along the longer span. An additional intermediate beam is
placed midspan of the slab to give additional support.
 Load is distributed in one side

 Intermediate beams help in carrying load
 Numerous number of beams

 Structure will not look spacious because of the beams
Flat Plate
Flat plates are designed to sustain itself. The usage of flat plates will eliminate most of the beams
in the structure making it better architecturally but it is said that flat plates will most likely carry
lesser load than the system with beams.
 Simple formwork and suitable for direct fix or sprayed ceiling

 No beams—simplifying under-floor services
 Minimum structural depth and reduced floor-to floor height.
 Medium spans
 Limited lateral load capacity as part of a moment frame
 May need shear heads or shear reinforcement at the columns or larger columns for shear
 Long-term deflection may be controlling factor
 May not be suitable for supporting brittle (masonry) partitions
 May not be suitable for heavy loads.
Source: https://goo.gl/ZkKvNz
36
3.6 Initial Cost Estimate
The designer provided an initial estimate of the two-way slab, the one-way slab with intermediate
beams, and the flat plates for the initial deliberation of the design constraints and tradeoffs for the
five-storey commercial building. The values given on the initial estimates are based solely on the
floor system of the project and was used to give the designer an overview on the ability of each
trade-offs to satisfy the design criteria given.
Estimated Value
Constraint
Two-Way One-Way Flat Plate
Economical 499,266 467,388 539,865
Manufacturability 1231.52 Manhours 1152.89 Manhours 1331.64 Manhours
Safety 13.06mm 9.79mm 19.58mm
Table 3-2: Summary of Initial Estimate 4

*Reference: Economical Constraint: http://www.inchcalculator.com/concrete-calculator/
**Reference: Manufacturability Constraint: http://theconstructor.org/practical-guide/rate-analysis-for-
reinforced-concrete/6954/
***Reference: Safety Constraint: http://www.adaptsoft.com/resources/ADAPT_TN292_floor_deflection.pdf
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
37
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
(Economical) For Two-Way = 5 - (0.64+0.75)/2 = 4 (Highest = 5)
(Economical) For One-Way = 5 - (0.64+1.340)/2 = 4
(Economical) For Flat Plate = 5 - (0.75+1.34)/2 = 3
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
38
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
(Manufacturability) For Two-Way = 5 - (0.64+0.75)/2 = 4 (Highest=5)
(Manufacturability) For One-Way = 5 - (0.64+1.340)/2 = 4
(Manufacturability) For Flat Plate = 5 - (0.75+1.34)/2 = 3
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
39
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
(Safety) For Two-Way = 5 - (2.5+0.34)/2 = 3
(Safety) For One-Way = 5 - (2.5+0.33)/2 = 3
(Safety) For Flat Plate = 5 - (.5+0.33)/2 = 4 (Highest = 5)
40
CHAPTER 4: DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE
4.1 Design Methodology
This five storey building was aligned and designed with respect to the National Building code of the
Philippines and ACI.
Figure 4-1: Stages of the Design Process

The designer adapted a design process for the five-storey residential building as illustrated in the figure
above (Figure 4-1). As shown above the first step is conceptualization, the designer came up with this
residential project as a possible solution for the uprising problem regarding residential occupations here
around in Metro Manila. The designer used Staad v8i to analyze the loading on the design of structure. As
such that moment and shear was given on each member the designer designed each member considering
its maximum.
41
4.1.1 Design of Beams
The process for designing the beams for the structure is shown below. The beam was designed
against flexural stress and shear stress. The designer’s priority when designing the beam was to ensure
safety in such a way that the beams will oppose the load applied to it effectively. The beams were designed
considering the maximum moment and shear on every Grid on each of the trade-off. Beams will be
considered fixed on every point may it be internal or external.
Figure 4-2: Flow Chart for the Design of Beams
4.1.1.1 Results
Result for the beam was taken from different loading allowable. In conclusion the beam was
selected in the structural analysis done in Staad Pro v8i. The dimension of the beams are only
used for the preliminary design and will be subjected to further analysis.
Beam Dimension Design Moment Area Steel mm^2 Allowable

(mm) (KN-m) Deflection Smax
(mm) (mm.)
B-1 300 x 400 296.16 1570.8 12.50 180
Table 4.1-1: Beam Design Results
42
4.1.2 Design of Columns
Next is the design of columns. The design for columns is very important since it supports the whole
structure against the axial loads . All columns are designed as tied columns. The column is
assumed to be square with a dimension of 300mm and the assumed ratio of reinforcement is 0.03
which is within the limits of 0.01 to 0.06. The designer also followed the specification given for the
maximum spacing
Figure 4-3: Flow Chart for the Design of Columns
4.1.2.1 Results
The column cross-section from the design analysis has a dimension of 300 mm. x 300 mm. The
column is designed to resist additional loadings due to its increased capacity. The size of the
reinforcement bars for the column is 20 mm.The column is designed against eccentric loading on
all floors. The minimum number of bars for the column is four pieces. To show the results in the
structural analsis, few columns were also selected. The results shown are from Staad Pro v8i.
These values were used in the preliminary design of the columns.
43
Column Dimension Design Axial Design Moment @ X Design Moment @ Y
(mm) Force (kN/m) Direction Direction Smax
(kN-m) (kN-m) (mm)
C-1 300 x 300 879.9 127.16 152.67 150

Table 4.1-2: Column Design Results
4.1.3 Design of Two-Way Slab
The design for the two-way slab trade-off is shown in the figure below. The designer used the
direct design method for the design of the two way slab. In this method, the designer gets a design
strip and identifies the maximum actual moment that affects the slab. The designer then assumes
an initial area for the design and solves the maximum moment capability of the slab.
Figure 4-4-: Flow Chart for the Design of Two-Way Slab
4.1.3.1 Results
After analyzing the slabs, the results are shown in the table below. The slab thickness assumed for
designing the slab is 120 mm. The spacing of the reinforcement bars on both directions is 360 mm.
on centers. As with the beam and column, few strips were selected to show the results of the
design made for the slab.
44
Slab Design Moment (kN-m) As(+) (mm2) As(-) (mm2)
S-1 25.85 677.9 677.9
S-2 106.56 1613 1613
Table 4.1-3: Two way slab Design Results

4.1.4 Design of One-way Slab
The design for the one-way slab trade-off is shown in the figure below. The designer used the
universal stress design method for the design of the one way slab. In this method, the designer
gets a design strip and identifies the maximum actual moment that affects the slab. The designer
then assumes an initial area for the design and solves the maximum moment capability of the slab.
Figure 4-5: Flow Chart for the Design of One- Way Slab
4.1.4.1 Results
designing the slab is 120 mm. The spacing of the reinforcement bars on both directions is 360 mm. on
centers. As with the beam and column, few strips were selected to show the results of the design made for
the slab.
45
Slab Design Moment (kN- As(+) (mm2) Temp Bars
m)
S-1 106.56 1613 677.9
Table 4.1-4: One way slab Design Result

4.1.5 Design of Flat Plate
The design of the flat plate is shown below. The designer will use universal stress design method
for the design of the flat plate. The designer then assumes the initial area for the flat plate to
calculate the maximum moment and deflection as such.
Figure 4-6: Flow Chart for the Design of Flat Plate

4.1.5.1 Results
designing the slab is 120 mm. The spacing of the reinforcement bars on both directions is 120 mm.
on centers. As with the beam and column, few strips were selected to show the results of the
design made for the slab.
Slab Design Moment (kN-m) As(+) (mm2) As(-) (mm2)
46
S-1 25.85 677.9 677.9
S-2 106.56 556.24 1955.96
Table 4.1-5:Flat Plate Design Results
4.2 Geometric Modeling (Two-Way Slab)

The figure shows the geometric modeling of the structure for the first trade-off (two-way slab) via
Staad.
Geometric Modeling of Two-Way Slab (Figure 4.2-1)
47
4.2.1 Framing Plan (Two-Way Slab)
4.2.2 Wind Load
(Figure 4.2.2-1) Wind Load at X
48
(Figure 4.2.2-1) Wind Load at Z
4.2.3 SEISMIC LOAD
49
(Figure 4.2.3-1) Seismic at Z
(Figure 4.2.3-2) Seismic at X
4.2.4 LOADING
50
(Figure 4.2.4) Loadings
4.2.5 DEFLECTION
(Figure 4.2.5) Deflection
4.2.6 FORCES
51
(Figure 4.2.6) Forces on Structure
4.2.7 STRESS
(Figure 4.2.7) Stresses on Structure
4.2.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (Two-Way Slab)
The figure shows the summary of results for the structure. It includes the maximum forces,
minimum forces, maximum moments, and minimum moments on all directions.
52
4.3 Geometric Modeling (One-Way Slab)
The figure shows the geometric modeling of the structure for the first trade-off (one-way slab) via
Staad v8i.
Geometric Modeling of One-Way Slab (Figure 4.3-1)
53
4.3.1 Framing Plan (One-Way Slab)
4.3.2 Wind Load
54
4.3.3 SEISMIC LOAD
55
4.3.4 LOADING
56
4.3.5 DEFLECTION

4.3.6 Forces
57
4.3.7 STRESS
(Figure 4.3.7) Stresses on Structure

4.3.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (One-Way Slab)
The figure shows the summary of results for the structure. It includes the maximum forces,
minimum forces, maximum moments, and minimum moments on all directions.
58
4.4 Geometric Modeling (Flat Plate)
The figure shows the geometric modeling of the structure for the first trade-off (Flat Plate) via Staad
v8i.
Geometric Modeling of Flat Plate(Figure 4.4-1)

4.4.1 Framing Plan (Flat Plate)
59
4.4.2 Wind Load
60
4.4.3 SEISMIC LOAD
61
4.4.4 LOADING

4.4.5 DEFLECTION
62
4.4.6 Forces

4.3.7 STRESS
(Figure 4.4.7) Stress Diagram
63
4.4.8 SUMMARY OF RESULTS (Flat Plate)
The figure shows the summary of results for the structure. It includes the maximum forces, minimum forces,
maximum moments, and minimum moments on all directions.
4.5 Validation of Multiple Constraints, Trade-Offs, and Standards

The initial deliberation shown on Chapter 3 was done with the help of proper resources and
calculations. In this section, the designer will analyze and validate the given constraints and design
trade-offs by the use of more detailed calculations and complete presentation of data.
As shown in the initial deliberation done in Chapter 3, the floor system consisting of a one-way slab
with intermediate beams is more economical than the floor system consisted of the two-
way slab and the flat plate considering that the flat plate is also designed as a two way. This
deliberation was done considering the concrete works for each floor system. In this deliberation,
the designer will now consider the materials needed for the construction of each floor system. The
cost of each materials will be deliberated to show which floor system will be more economical.
Since the lowest seems to be the one way slab system, it will be compared to the second lowest
which is the two-way slab system
ECONOMIC COST COMPARISON
Material Two-way Slab One-way Slab Flat Plate (PHP) Savings (PHP) %Savings (One
Description System (PHP) System w/ way vs two
Intermediate way)
Beams (PHP)
Cement 248437.2 241583.8 257004 18470.00 2.75%
Gravel 61248 59558.4 63360 2883.60 2.76%
Sand 98397 95682.6 101790 7691.2 2.7%
Reinforcing Bars 408000 367880 442000 417519.18 9.83%
64
4.6 Final Estimates of the Trade-Offs
Aside from the validation of the economical constraints of both trade-offs, it will also be deliberated
and evaluated based on the manufacturability constraint and safet constraint. The deliberation for
the manufacturability constraint will be based on the duration of the construction for each floor
system. While the evaluation for the safety constraint will be based on the deflection of the slab at
a given floor level with respect to the capacity of the slab and beams to support the load applied to
the structure. Hence, the total cost of the structure, the total duration of construction for the two
floor systems and the maximum deflection that could occur on the slab is indicated for a more
thorough comparison of each trade-off.
Estimated Value
Constraint
Two-way Slab One-way Slab Flat Plate
Economical PHP 2,272,302.4 PHP 1,810,902 PHP 2,175,760
Manufacturability 29,556.48 hours 27,669.36 hours 31,959.36 hours
Safety 6.43mm 5.7 mm. 7.14mm
4.7 Computation for the Final Designer’s Ranking
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
Computation of ranking for the Economical Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
65
(Economical) For Two-Way = 2+0.42 = 2.42
(Economical) For One-Way = 1.67+2 = 3.67
(Economical) For Flat Plate = 1.67+0.42 = 2.09
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
Computation of ranking for the Manufacturability Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
(Manufacturability) For Two-Way = (0.64+0.75) = 1.39
(Manufacturability) For One-Way = 5 - (0.64+1.340) = 1.98
(Manufacturability) For Flat Plate = 5 - (0.75+1.34) = 2.09
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (Two-Way to One-Way)
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (Two-Way to Flat Plate)
66
Computation of ranking for the Safety Constraint (One-Way to Flat Plate)
(Safety) For Two-Way = (1.14+0.99) = 2.13
(Safety) For One-Way = (2+1.14) = 3.14
(Safety) For Flat Plate = (2+0.99) = 2.99
Criterion’s Ability to satisfy the criterion

Importance (on a scale from -5 to 5)
Decision Criteria (on a scale
of 0 to 5)
One–Way Slab Flat Plate with less
Two–Way
with Intermediate beam
Slab
Beams
1. Economic 4 2.42 3.67 2.09
2. Manufacturability 4 1.39 1.98 2.09
3. Safety 5 2.13 3.14 2.99
Over-all Rank 25.89 38.3 31.67
Table 4.7: Final Raw Designer’s Ranking

4.8 Designer’s Final Ranking Assessment
The final result of the ranking proved that the one way slab has the highest assessment of the following
trade offs. It is due to to that the criterion scale focused its design on the safety while the manufacturability
and economic constraints remained the on the same importance.
67
CHAPTER 5: FINAL DESIGN
The designer was able to come up with a structural design and a little of the architectural design of a five-
storey residential building which is in accordance with existing codes and standards. The design of each
member had undergone thorough investigation and deliberation and has been proven to be safe against
shear and deflection. The members were also proven to be able to sustain loads that may be applied on it.
As for the given trade-offs for the design of the floor system of the structure, the one-way slab with
intermediate beams was proven to be safer than the rest of the trade-offs. Considering the given economic
constraint for the design of the structure the one way slab is more economical than the other two
constraints.
In conclusion, the designer concludes that the use of the one-way slab with intermediate beams is more
efficient and is the better option to adapt for the construction of the five-storey residential building
considering the constraints given.
5.1 Design Schedule
Slab Design Moment As(+) Temparatur Number of Bar Bar

(kN-m) (mm2) e Bars Bars Diameter Spacing
O.C.
S-1 106.56 1613 677.9 8 per meter 16mm 290mm
(Table 5-1) : Slab Schedule
(Figure 5-1): Elevation of Slab
68
Beam Dimension (mm) Design Moment (KN- Allowable
m) Deflection (mm) Smax Number
(mm.) of Bars
O.C. (20mm)
B-1 300 x 400 296.16 12.50
180 6
(Table 5-2): Beam Schedule
(Figure 5-3): Elevation of Beam
Column Dimension Design Axial Force Number of Bars (20mm Spacing Lateral Ties
(mm) (kN/m) Diameter) (10mm Diameter)
C-1 300 x 300 879.9 6 150mm
(Table 5-2): Beam Schedule
69
(Figure 5-4): Elevation of Column
70
APPENDIX A: CODES AND STANDARDS
National Building Code of the Philippines (NBC)
The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural plan of the
apartment building:
 Section 401. Types of Construction

Type I. The structural elements may be any of the materials permitted by this Code.
 Section 701. Occupancy Classified.

Group B. Residentials, Hotels and Apartments
 Section 805. Ceiling Heights.

Habitable rooms provided with artificial ventilation have\ ceiling heights not less than 2.40 meters measured
from the floor to the ceiling; Provided that for buildings of more than one-storey, the minimum ceiling height
of the first storey shall be 2.70 meters and that for the second storey 2.40 meters and succeeding storeys
shall have an unobstructed typical head-room clearance of not less than 2.10 meters above the finished
floor. Above stated rooms with a natural ventilation shall have ceiling height not less than 2.70 meters.
 Section 806. Size and Dimensions of Rooms.

Minimum sizes of rooms and their least horizontal dimensions shall be as follows:
1. Rooms for Human Habitations. 6.00 square meters with at least dimensions of 2.00
2. Kitchens. 3.00 square meters with at least dimension of 1.50 meters;
3. Bath and toilet. 1.20 square meters with at least dimension of 0.90 meters.
 Section 808. Window Openings.

Every room intended for any use, not provided with artificial ventilation system as herein specified in this
Code, shall be provided with a window or windows with a total free area of openings equal to at least ten
percent of the floor area of room, and such window shall open directly to a court, yard, public street or alley,
or open water courses.
 Section 1207. Stairs, Exits and Occupant Loads.

General. The construction of stairs and exits shall conform to the occupant load requirements of buildings,
reviewing stands, bleachers and grandstands:
a. Determinations of Occupant Loads. The Occupant load permitted in any building or portion thereof shall be
determined by dividing the floor area assigned to that use by the unit area allowed per occupant as
determined by the Secretary.
b. Exit Requirements. Exit requirements of a building or portion thereof used for different purposes shall be
determined by the occupant load which gives the largest number of persons. No obstruction shall be placed
in the required width of an exit except projections permitted by this Code.
71
National Structural Code of the Philippines (NSCP) C101-10
Notation
= gross area of section, mm2.
= area of nonprestressed tension reinforcement, mm2.
= minimum amount of flexural reinforcement, mm2.
= total area of nonprestressed longitudinal reinforcement (bars and steel shapes), mm2.
= area of shear reinforcement within a distance s, mm2.
= area of shear-friction reinforcement, mm2.
= area of compression reinforcement, mm2.
= width of compression face of member, mm.
= web width, mm.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to neutral axis, mm.
= clear cover from the nearest surface in tension to the surface of the flexural tension reinforcement, mm.
= a factor relating actual moment diagram to an equivalent uniform moment diagram.
= dead loads, or related internal moments and forces.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to centroid of compression reinforcement, mm.
= nominal diameter of bar, wire, or prestressing strand, mm.
= thickness of concrete cover measure from extreme tension fiber to center of bar or wire located closest thereto,
mm.
= distance from extreme tension fiber to centroid of tension reinforcement, mm.
= distance from extreme compression fiber to extreme tension steel, mm.
= load effects of earthquake, or related internal moments and forces.
= modulus of elasticity of concrete, MPa.
= modulus of elasticity of reinforcement, MPa.
= flexural stiffness of compression member, N-mm2.
72
= loads due to weight and pressures of fluids with well defined densities and controllable maximum heights, or
related internal moments and forces.
= specified compressive strength of concrete, MPa.
= specified yield strength of nonprestressed reinforcement, MPa.
= specified yield strength fy
= loads due to weight and pressure of soil, water in soil, or other materials, or related internal moments and
forces.
= overall thickness of member, mm.
= moment of inertia of section beam about the centroidal axis, mm4.
= moment of inertia of cracked section transformed to concrete, mm4.
= effective moment of inertia for computation of deflection, mm4.
= moment of inertia of gross concrete section about centroidal axis, neglecting reinforcement, mm4.
= live loads, or related internal moments and forces.
= development length, mm.
= length of clear span measured face-to-face of supports, mm.
= maximum moment in member at stage deflection is computed.
= cracking moment.
= nominal axial load strength at balanced strain conditions
= nominal axial load strength at given eccentricity.
= nominal shear strength provided by concrete
= wind load, or related integral moments and forces.
= unit weight of concrete, kN/m3.
= factored load per unit length of beam or per unit area of slab.
= ratio of flexural stiffness of beam section to flexural stiffness of a width of slab bounded laterally by center line
of adjacent panle, if any on each side of beam.
= average value of for all beams on edges of a panel.
= factor
73
= net tensile strain in extreme tension steel at nominal strength.
= modification factor reflection the reduced mechanical properties of lightweight concrete.
= multiplier for additional long-time deflection = ration of nonprestressed tension reinforcement = ⁄
= ratio of nonprestressed compression reinforcement = ⁄
= reinforcement ratio producing balanced strain conditions
= strength-reduction factor.
The following are the sections and codes that are followed in conceptualizing and designing the structural plan of the
apartment building:
 Section 203 - Combination of Load

a. Minimum densities for design loads from materials
b. Minimum design loads
c. Minimum uniform and concentrated live loads
 Section 206 - Other Minimum Loads

a. 206.3 Impact loads
b. 206.3.1 Elevators
c. 206.3.2 Machinery
 Section 207 - Wind Load

a. 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure
b. 207.5.6.6 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficient
c. 207.5.7.2 Topographic Factor
d. 207.5.4.4 Wind Directionality Factor
e. 207.5.6 Exposure
 Section 208 - Earthquake Loads

a. 208.5.1.1 Earthquake Loads
b. 208.5.2.1 Design Base Shear
c. 208.5.2.2 Structure Period
74
Wind Load
Section 207.5.4 Wind Directionality Factor
The wind directionality factor, Kd, shall be determined form Table 207-2. This factor Shall only be applied when used
in conjunction with load combinations specified in Section 203.3 and 203.4.
 Section 207.5.5 Importance factor

An importance factor Iw, for the building or other structure shall be determined from Table 207-3 based on
building and structure categories listed in Table 103-1.
 Section 207.5.6 Exposure

For each wind direction considered, the upwind exposure category shall be based on ground surface
roughness that is determined from natural topography, vegetation, and constructed facilities.
 Section 207.5.7 Topographic factor

The wind speed up effect shall be included in the calculation of design wind loads by using the factor k zt. If
site conditions and locations of structures do not meet all the conditions specified in Section 207.5.7.1 the
kzt= 1.0
 Section 207.5.8 Gust Effect factor

The gust effect factor shall be calculated as permitted in Sections 207.5.8.1 to 207.5.8.5, using appropriate
values for natural frequency and damping ratio as permitted in Section 207.5.8.6.
 Section 207.5.9 Enclosure Classifications

For the purpose of determining internal pressure coefficients, all buildings shall be classified as enclosed,
partially enclosed, or open as defined in Section 207.2.
 Section 207.5.10 Velocity Pressure

Velocity pressure, qz, evaluated at height z shall be calculated by the following equation qz= 47.3x10-6 kz kzt
kd V2 Iw.
 Section 207.5.11 Pressure and Force Coefficients

Internal Pressure Coefficients, GCpi, shall be determined from fig. 207-5 based on building enclosure
classifications determined from Section 207.5.9
 Section 207.5.12 Rigid Building for all heights

Design wind pressures for the MWFRS of a buildings of all heights shall be determined by the following
equation;
P= qGCP – qi(GCPi)
 Section 207.5.13 Design Wind Loads on Open Buildings with Monoslope, Pitched, or Troughed Roofs
Plus and minus signs signify pressure acting toward and away from the top surface of the roof, respectively.
 Section 207.5.14 Design Wind Loads on Solid Freestanding Walls and Solid Signs
The design wind force for solid freestanding walls and solid signs shall be determined by the following
formula:
F= qhGCfAs
75
 Section 207.5.15 Design Wind Loads on other Structures
The design wind force for other structures shall be determined by the following equation:
F=qzGfCfAf
Earthquake Load
 Section 208.5.1 Earthquake Loads and Modeling Requirements

Structures shall be designed for ground motion producing structural response and seismic forces in any
horizontal direction. The following earthquake loads shall be used in the load combinations set forth in
Section 203:
E= ρEh + Eb
 Section 208.5.2 Static Force Procedure

Section 208.5.2.1
The total design base shear in a given direction shall be determined form the following equation:
V= CvI (W)
RT
The total design base shear need not exceed the following:
V= 2.5CaI (W)
R
The Base Shear shall not be less than the following:

V= .11CaIW
 Section 208.5.2.2
The value of T shall be determined using the following method:
Determine the structure period T using Method A

T = Ct (hn)3/4
76
The following are the tables used in each design computations:
Stone Concrete Fill 1.53 Kpa
Gypsum Board 0.2 Kpa
Suspended Steel Channel 0.1 Kpa
Mechanical Duct Allowance 0.2 Kpa
Terrazo 1.53 Kpa
Grout 0.11 Kpa
CHB 1.65 Kpa
Clay Dry 0.6435 Kpa
Water Proofing 0.05 Kpa
Cement Finish 1.53 pa
Table 204-1 Minimum Densities for Design Loads from Materials
Material Density (KN/m3)
Masonry, Concrete 16.5
Table 204-2 Minimum Design Dead Loads
Basic Floor Area 1.9 Kpa
Roof Live Load 1.9 Kpa
Table 205-1 Minimum Uniform Concentrated Live Loads
Occupancy Category Seismic Importance Factor I Seismic Importance Factor Ip
I. Essential facilities 1.5 1.5
II. Hazardous facilities 1.25 1.5
III. Special Occupancy Structures 1 1
77
IV. Standard Occupancy Strutures 1 1
V. Miscellaneous Structures 1 1
Table 208-1 Seismic Importance Factors
Soil Profile Soil Profile Name Ave. Properties for Top 30 m Soil Profile
Shear Wave Velocity SPT Undrained Shear Strenght
SA Hard Rock >1500
SB Rock 760 to 1500
Sc Very Dense Soil 360 to 760 >50 >100
SD Stiff Soil Profile 180 to 360 15 to 50 50 to 100
SE Soft Soil Profile <180 <15 <50
SF Soil Requiring Site-Specific Evaluation See Section 208.4.3.1
Table 208-2 Soil Profile Types
Zone 2 4
Z 0.2 0.4
Table 208-3 Seismic Zone Factor Z
Seismic Source Type Closest Distance to Known
Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km ≥10 Km
A 1.2 1
B 1 1
C 1 1
Table 208-4 Near-Source factor Na
78
Seismic Source Type Closest Distance to Known
Seismic Source
≤ 5 Km 10 Km ≥15 Km
A 1.6 1.2 1
B 1.2 1 1
C 1 1 1
Table 208-5 Near-Source factor Nv
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type 2 4
Z=0.2 Z=0.4
SA 0.16 .32Na
SB 0.2 .40Na
Sc 0.24 .40Na
SD 0.28 .44Na
SE 0.34 .44Na
SF See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-7 Seismic Coefficient, Ca
Seismic Zone
Soil Profile Type 2 4
Z=0.2 Z=0.4
SA 0.16 .32Na
79
SB 0.20 .40Na
Sc 0.32 .56Na
SD 0.40 .64Na
SE 0.64 .96Na
SF See Footnote 1 of Table 208-8
Table 208-8 Seismic Coefficient, Cv
System Limitation and
Basic Seismic Force Resisting System R Ω0 Building Limitation
Zone 2 Zone 4
C. Moment Resisting Frame
Special reinforced concrete moment frames 8.5 2.8 NL NL
Table 208-11A Earthquake Force –Resisting Structural Systems of Concrete
Zone Classification Province
(Basic Wind Speed)
Zone 2 National Capital Region
V=200 kph
Table 207-1 Wind Zone for the Different Provinces of the Philippines
Directionality
Structural Type factor Kd
Buildings
°Main Wind Force Resisting System 0.85
°Components and Cladding 0.85
Arched Roof
Chimneys, Tanks, and Similar Structures
80
°Square 0.9
°Hexagonal 0.95
°Round 0.95
Soild Signs 0.85
Open Signs and Lattice Framework 0.85
Trussed Towers
°Triangular. Square, rectangular 0.85
°All other cross sections 0.95
Table 207-2 Wind Directionality factor
Occupancy Category Description Iw
I Essential 1.15
II Hazardous 1.15
III Special Occupancy 1.15
IV Standard Occupancy 1
V Miscellaneous 0.87
Table 207-3 Importance factor Iw
Exposure (Note 1)
B C D
Height above Ground Level (m) Case 1 Case 2 Cases 1& 2 Cases 1&2
0-4.5 0.7 0.57 0.85 1.03
6 0.7 0.62 0.9 1.08
7.5 0.7 0.66 0.94 1.12
9 0.7 0.7 0.98 1.16
12 0.76 0.76 1.04 1.22
15 0.81 0.81 1.09 1.27
81
18 0.85 0.85 1.13 1.31
Table 207-4 Velocity Pressure Exposure Coefficients
82
APPENDIX B: COST ESTIMATES
83
84
APPENDIX C: MANUAL COMPUTATION OF BEAMS For Two – Way Slab
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
One – Way Slab
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
APPENDIX D: MANUAL COMPUTATION OF COLUMNS
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
APPENDIX E: COMPUTATION FOR SLAB
149
150
151

Kaquilala Junrey Z. RCD

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Kaquilala Junrey Z. RCD

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TECHNOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF THE PHILIPPINES

938 AURORA BOULEVARD CUBAO QUEZON CITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

DESIGN OF 5-STOREY RESIDENTIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING

ENGR. MICO P. CRUZADO

Student/Team Group KAQUILALA, JUNREY Z.

Sustainability indeed plays an important role in construction industry since

1.1 The Project

Figure1-1: Perspective View of the Project

Figure 1-2: Site Location of the Project

1.3 Project Objectives

1.3.1 General Objective:

1.3.2 Specific Objectives:

1.5 Project Scope and Limitations

The scopes for the design of the project are as follows:

1.6 Project Development

2.1 Description of the Structure

The structure is designed to be a five-storey residential building and is to be located along

Figure 2-3 Structural Model of the Building for Flat Plate

Room Description Function Area

For Reception of Tenants and Visitors Reception Area 10.84 m2

For Business Purposes Rentable Unit 36.75 m2

For Business Purposes Rentable Unit 32.68 m2

Comfort Room for Ground Floor Comfort Room 6.25 m2

Table 2-1: Room Classification with Corresponding Area

Table 2-2: Function and Quantity of Room

2.3.1 Dead Loads

Concrete (Reinforced) 23.6

Elevator(includes self weight and passenger 17.34

2.3.2 Live Loads

2.3.3 Earthquake Load Parameters

Soil Profile Type Stiff Soil Profile (Type 4)

Seismic Zone Zone 4 (Z=0.4)

Seismic Source Type A

Closest Distance to known Seismic Source 10.2km

Near-Source Factor (Na) 1

Near Source Factor (Nv) 1.1123

R (Special R.C. Moment Resisting Frame) 8.5

Building Classification Category IV

Structure Type Building Structure

Enclosed Classification Enclosed

2.4 Architectural Plans

Figure 2-4: Ground Floor Plan 4

Figure 2-6: Front Elevation Plan

Figure 2-8: Left Elevation Plan

Load History Effect on Cyclic Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Tied Columns

Analytical Moment‐Curvature Relations for Tied Concrete Columns

A model of confined concrete in high-strength reinforced concrete tied columns

Effects of Confinement on Concrete Columns: Plasticity Approach

Testing and modeling of a novel FRP-encased steel–concrete composite column

Flexural–torsional buckling of open section composite columns with shear deformation

Thermal buckling of a heat-exposed, axially restrained composite column

The Behavior of reinforced concrete slabs in Fire

3.1 Design Constraints

In this project, the limiting constraints are as follows:

3.1.1 Economical (Cost)

3.1.2 Safety (Bending)

3.1.3 Manufacturability (Man Hour Production)

ONE WAY SLAB

Image Source: https://goo.gl/F0NGsc

TWO WAY SLAB

Image Source: https://www.google.com/search